A Rational Explanation of Noah's Flood

Copyright 2014 by Donald R. Tveter, don@dontveter.com

(and tweaked from time to time)

This document may be freely distributed provided it is complete and unchanged.

Of all the silly beliefs young Earth creationists have this one may be the silliest one of all. Young Earth creationists say the entire planet was flooded and two of every kind of animal in the world fit into an itsy-bitsy ark. So everyone just naturally asks, where did all the water come from? Where did it go? How do you fit all those animals into the ark and their food besides? And don't forget, what about all the plants? How did they survive the flood? How can anyone believe the young Earth creationist interpretation of the story?

Explaining Noah's flood has become quite easy. At the time of Noah's flood a rather large comet or meteor slammed into the Indian Ocean and left behind what scientists call the Burckle impact crater. The crater is 18 miles wide and 12,000 feet below the surface. The impact caused a huge tsunami that left behind evidence in Africa, India and Australia. In fact, that's how the crater was discovered in the first place. Scientists worked backward from the evidence they found in Africa, India and Australia. It was that tsunami that lifted up the ark and carried it into the mountains of Ararat. (Note that the Bible clearly says that it landed in the mountains of Ararat and NOT on top of Mt. Ararat.) It also seems pretty reasonable that a comet would have spawned some rain as well. If you want more details see the book, The Comets of God by Jeffrey Goodman or there is also this online article "Noah's Flood Was Really a Tsunami Caused by a Comet: A Retranslation of Genesis 7:11" (blogs.christianpost.com/comets-of-god/noahs-flood-was-really-a-tsunami-caused-by-a-comet-a-retranslation-of-genesis-711-8825) by Goodman.

It was really nice of God to have created the flood in such a way as to leave some physical evidence behind that confirms the Biblical account. But why do young Earth creationists ignore this evidence and continue to insist on their ridiculous interpretation of the Bible that only discredits the Bible? I know the answer, do you?